Click the case name for better results:

Accession of The European Union to the European Convention for The Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: ECJ 18 Dec 2014

ECJ (Opinion of the full court) Opinion pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU – Draft international agreement – Accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – Compatibility of the draft agreement with the EU and FEU TreatiesHeld: ‘The agreement on the accession of the European … Continue reading Accession of The European Union to the European Convention for The Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: ECJ 18 Dec 2014

Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie: CA 20 Aug 1999

A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the costs of a child’s education. Any consequences of a failure to keep a promise … Continue reading Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie: CA 20 Aug 1999

Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010

The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2. Held: The SSD’s appeal succeeded. ‘jurisdiction’ within the meaning of Article … Continue reading Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010

Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for which a prosecution was authorised was framed so as to breach the accused’s human rights was to … Continue reading Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

X v United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Mar 1972

(Commission) The applicant said that having been pressured into pleading guilty: ‘The Commission examined this complaint under Article 6 (1) (Art. 6-1) of the Convention which guarantees the right to a fair trial, and also under Article 6(2) (Art. 6-2) of the Convention, which provides that ‘Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed … Continue reading X v United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Mar 1972

Brown v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 2002

Article 6(2) of the Convention was not violated by a provision which enabled a newspaper proprietor or publisher to escape strict liability under section 4(5) of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 only if he proved, on the balance of probabilities, that he was in no way at fault in connection with the offending publication.‘The … Continue reading Brown v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 2002

Euro Wines (C and C) Ltd v HMRevenue and Customs: CA 25 Jan 2018

‘Where a penalty is imposed on a person in possession of goods on which it is alleged that excise duty has not been paid, is the reverse burden of proof on whether duty has been paid incompatible with article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the Convention)? The Upper Tribunal … Continue reading Euro Wines (C and C) Ltd v HMRevenue and Customs: CA 25 Jan 2018

Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 5 May 2005

Widowers claimed that, in denying them benefits which would have been payable to widows, the Secretary of State had acted incompatibly with their rights under article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 and article 8 of the ECHR. Held: The Secretary’s appeal succeeded. Section 6 of the 1998 Act permitted the discrimination as … Continue reading Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 5 May 2005

Euro Wines (C and C) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 4 Aug 2016

UTTC EXCISE DUTY – penalty for handling goods subject to unpaid excise duty – FA 2008, Sch 41, para 4(1) – whether penalty assessment is a ‘criminal charge’ for the purpose of Article 6, European Convention on Human Rights – whether reverse burden of proof in s 154 CEMA is incompatible with the presumption of … Continue reading Euro Wines (C and C) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 4 Aug 2016

Lutz v Germany: ECHR 25 Aug 1987

Only criminal charges attract the additional protections under article 6(2) and 6(3). Insofar as these provisions apply to ‘everyone charged with a criminal offence’ it is well established in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights that this concept is co-extensive with the concept of the determination of any criminal charge. As to … Continue reading Lutz v Germany: ECHR 25 Aug 1987

Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019

These appeals concern the statutory provisions governing the eligibility for compensation of persons convicted of a criminal offence where their conviction is subsequently quashed (or they are pardoned) because of the impact of fresh evidence. It was argued that the failure to make payment amounted to a denial of the right to the presumption of … Continue reading Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019

Sekanina v Austria: ECHR 25 Aug 1993

The applicant was detained on remand for about a year on suspicion of murdering his wife. He was acquitted by a jury. He applied for compensation for costs incurred in his defence and pecuniary damage sustained during his detention under the relevant Austrian legislation. On the ground that suspicion remained concerning the applicant’s involvement in … Continue reading Sekanina v Austria: ECHR 25 Aug 1993

Capeau v Belgium: ECHR 13 Jan 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-2; Not necessary to examine Art. 14.The accused had been investigated for suspected arson but discharged by the court on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to commit him for trial. He claimed compensation for pre-trial detention on remand. Under the local law, there … Continue reading Capeau v Belgium: ECHR 13 Jan 2005

Allen (formerly Harris), Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: CA 15 Jul 2008

The claimant appealed against refusal of a review of the defendant to allow her compensation after her conviction for manslaughter of her infant son was quashed. Held: The conviction had been based on flawed expert evidence. Article 6(2) had no application to section 133. Hughes LJ [2008] EWCA Civ 808, [2009] 1 Cr App R … Continue reading Allen (formerly Harris), Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: CA 15 Jul 2008

Adams, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 11 May 2011

The three claimants had each been convicted of murders and served time. Their convictions had been reversed eventually, and they now appealed against the refusal of compensation for imprisonment, saying that there had been a miscarriage of justice. Held: The appeal of Adams was denied, but those of MacDermott and McCartney allowed (by majority). The … Continue reading Adams, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 11 May 2011

Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency: SC 26 Oct 2011

Civil recovery orders had been made against the applicant. He had been accused and acquitted of drug trafficking allegations in Europe, but the judge had been persuaded that he had no proper explanation for the accumulation of his wealth, and had rejected his evidence as unreliable. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. The making of an … Continue reading Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency: SC 26 Oct 2011

Cusack v London Borough of Harrow: SC 19 Jun 2013

The landowner practised from property in Harrow. The former garden had now for many years been used as a forecourt open to the highway, for parking cars of staff and clients. Cars crossed the footpath to gain access, and backing out into the road when leaving. That use was recognised as lawful under planning law. … Continue reading Cusack v London Borough of Harrow: SC 19 Jun 2013

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Revitt, Borg and Barnes v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 Sep 2006

The defendants appealed against refusal of leave to withdraw their pleas of guilty. They argued that the current practice infringed their human rights. Held: The magistrates had been correct not to allow the defendants to withdraw their pleas. Where a defendant makes an unequivocal plea of guilty which the court accepts, the defendant is thereupon … Continue reading Revitt, Borg and Barnes v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 Sep 2006

X v United Kingdom: ECHR 1972

The defendant had been convicted of knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution contrary to section 30(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956. Held: The Commission rejected as manifestly ill-founded the applicant’s challenge to this provision as incompatible with article 6(2). It created a rebuttable presumption which the defendant could disprove, and was not a … Continue reading X v United Kingdom: ECHR 1972

Al-Khawaja v The United Kingdom; Tahery v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Jan 2009

Each complainant said that in allowing hearsay evidence to be used against them at their trials, their article 6 human rights had been infringed. In the first case the complainant had died before trial but her statement was admitted. Held: In each case, applying Luca, the trials infringed the right to a fair trial since … Continue reading Al-Khawaja v The United Kingdom; Tahery v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Jan 2009

Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the Convention the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself are generally recognised international … Continue reading Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

Regina v Johnstone: HL 22 May 2003

The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act could become criminal. The prosecutor appealed the decision of … Continue reading Regina v Johnstone: HL 22 May 2003

A Primary Care Trust v P and Others: Misc 21 Dec 2009

(Court of Protection) The court was asked whether, if P could be found to lack mental capacity where he should live, where there was an essential conflict between representatives of the State who owe statutory duties to P on the one hand, and the view of his carer of 18-plus years standing on the other, … Continue reading A Primary Care Trust v P and Others: Misc 21 Dec 2009

Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: SC 16 Jul 2014

The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human Rights under article 6(2) and under common law. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: SC 16 Jul 2014

Mubarak v Mubarak: CA 2001

A judgment summons, issued was issued by the wife to enforce a lump sum order made against her husband in their divorce proceedings. The judge had performed his statutory duty which included having to satisfy himself under s. 25 of the 1973 Act of the income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources of the … Continue reading Mubarak v Mubarak: CA 2001